>>42564341It is a bad move politically because she is a billionaire who doesn't care what people say about her online since she's already made her money. Also when trying to advocate for social issues the goal is trying to move the opinions of the average person, to the masses Harry potter is one of the largest brands in the world and the outrage against Rowling isn't understood. The argument is that based on people she has supported and comments she's made, Rowling outed herself as an anti trans extremist, but she's never directly stated any of those opinions so to the average person it looks like they're putting words in her mouth and then attacking her over those words.
The issue is too nuanced and the target is too established for this to actually benefit their goals. Instead you get people either dismissing it completely or spending 5 minutes looking into it and dismissing it. Worst case you appear like unreasonable extremists and drive people away from your goals.
This is literally the dumbest controversy I've seen and I've lost more braincells learning about it than I do reading the board.
